Won''t give up

[timbo]

Hi all -

Still in search of an EMERALD Diamond for my girl. I am confused (again)!!! This emrald is listed as Signature "Ideal" and they are saying it is the best cut..yet...when I view an Ideal cut from this site...this falls into a 2A, 2B cut??? Any thoughts?? As always appreciate anyones input.

timbo

Cut: Signature Ideal
Carat weight: 1.51
Cut: Signature Emerald
Color: I
Clarity: VS1
Depth %: 67.9%
Table %: 67%
Symmetry: Very good
Polish: Very good
Girdle: Thin
Culet: Small
Fluorescence: Faint
Measurements: 7.46x5.73x3.89 mm
Length/width ratio: 1.30

 

[Giangi]

To find out if it's a class 2A or 2B, we must know crown height and pavilion depth... Are you able to get them?

 

[timbo]

thanks giangi - I will email them to get those %. This is what "they" say

This ideal emerald-cut includes a crown height greater than 9% of the total diamond height, a culet, and more evenly distributed pavilion facets. A higher crown height with a smaller table creates larger crown facets that capture more light. The culet and the distribution of pavilion facets reflect more light, in an even display of brilliance.

timbo

 

[Giangi]

OK... Let us know these results...

 

[dimonbob]

Hello Timbo;

You said, they said: "This ideal emerald-cut includes a crown height greater than 9% of the total diamond height, a culet, and more evenly distributed pavilion facets. A higher crown height with a smaller table creates larger crown facets that capture more light. The culet and the distribution of pavilion facets reflect more light, in an even display of brilliance."

In my opinion, either you have misquoted them or they are giving you a song and dance. In other they don't know what they are talking about. Diamond percentages come from the diameter of any cut including emerald cuts. The diameter of the diamond in question is 5.73mm. The crown height should be, according to Dave Atlas, 12.3 to 14.4% of 5.73mm. If I take a middle number like 13.3% x 5.73mm I get
0.762mm. If I use 9% x the depth of 3.89mm that is 0.35mm.
To get even close to the desired 0.762mm depth I would need to use over 19% of the total depth. He did say greater than but 19 is more than twice that of 9.

Maybe I am nitpicking but something is not right.
Most emerald cuts have a 9 to 10% crown height but most emerald cuts also have large black areas due to the very shallow crowns and deep pavilions.
Just my opinion.

 

[timbo]

thanks Bob -

That quote came right off of their website and I think it was a decent on line diamond company...Yeah - I guess I am getting frustrated in the sense that all these sites dont give you all the things you look for like Crown %, Pavilion Depth, etc....So..I guess you have to ask or once you find one you like bring it to someone right away to look at...thanks for your input.

timbo

 

[Giangi]

Yep! I didn't notice that!!! Maybe it's just a typo(or so I hope

)...
What did they say about crown and pavilion %??

Giangi

 

[Mara]

'Signature Ideal'...sounds like this is a Blue Nile stone. I have run some of their stones through the HCA and come up with 2 and 3 scores, so every stone is not exactly the cream of the crop. The Signature Ideal brand is just that, a brand...and it does not mean foolproof. The fact that by the #'s you say it falls more into a 2A/2B category does not make it an 'ideal' stone, BUT the 2A/2B rating is still excellent...it is more when you get into the 3 ratings that you may want to keep looking. So if the price is right and all the numbers work out once you get things figured out, it may be a good buy.

Good luck...get more info as the others suggested.

 

[timbo]

Thanks Mara -

It was from Blue Nile....yeah bottom line here is I think am getting way too caught up in this "Ideal" cut thing cause I am reading so much about the importance of it..with that said it is is very important to me but a 2A/2B is probably as close as I will get and still be very satisfied!! thanks everyone has been and always is helpful!

timbo